Model of ecosystem-based management approach in lombok island

MODEL OF ECOSYSTEM-BASED

-MANAGEMENT APPROACH IN LOMBOK ISLAND

ERSA HERWINDA

GRADUATE SCHOOL

BOGOR AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY
2006

MODEL OF ECOSYSTEM-BASED
MANAGEMENT APPROACH IN LOMBOK ISLAND

ERSA HERWINDA

A Thesis submitted for the degree of Master of Science
Of Bogor Agricultural University

MASTER OF SCIENCE IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
FOR NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

GRADUATE SCHOOL
BOGOR AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY
August 2006

STATEMENT

I, Ersa Herwinda, here by stated that this thesis entitled:
Model of Ecosystem-Based Management Approach
In Lombok Island
are results of my own work during the period of November 2005 until January
2006 and that it has not been published before. The content of the thesis has been
examined by the advising committee and the external examiner.

Bogor, November 2006

Ersa Henvinda

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

There are many people I would like to express my appreciations in regard

to this study. I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor Dr. Ir.
Hatrisari Hardjomidjojo and my co-supervisor Ir. Iwan Setiawan, PM for their
guidance, technical comments and visionary thinking through months of my
research. I would like to thank to Dr. Yuli Suharnoto and Dr. Vincentius P.
Siregar as the examiner of this thesis for their positive ideas and inputs, and also
Dr. Tania June as Program Coordinator of MIT.

I would like to thank to SEAMEO-BIOTROP management and staff, and
also IPB Postgraduate directorate that support our administration, technical and
facility. I would also like to thank our lecturers at MIT and all other IPB lecturers
who have taught me the very important knowledge and shared their experience.
I would also like to express my thanks to my colleagues in MIT and

BAPPENAS, especially my project-fellow, to those who assisted me by working
hand-in-hand to support each other to finish this study right on time and providing
valuable materials.
Ongoing appreciation and gratitude is conveyed to my dear husband, Agus
Budi Utomo, for his constructive motivation, moral support and patience during
the course and my lovely daughter, Alika Nisa Adelina, for her chubby-cheek and
laughter that enlighten my time during research. I proudly dedicated this thesis to

my father and mother who have encourage my study through enthusiasm, valuable
suggestions, providing time and strength taking care of my precious one.

CURRICULUM VITAE

Ersa Herwinda was born in Bogor, West Java, Indonesia at June sth,1974.
She received her undergraduate diploma fiom Bogor Agricultural University in
1997 in the field of Forestry. From the year of 1997 to 2000, she worked for
Eastern Indonesia Development Council. Since 2000 to present, she works as
government official at the National Development Planning Agency with her
current position as a planner in the Directorate of and Environmental Mairs.

In the year of 2001, Ersa Herwinda pursued her graduate study. She
received her Master of Science in Information Technology for Natural Resources
Management fiom Bogor Agricultural University in 2006 respectively. Her thesis
was on "Model of Ecosystem-Based Management Approach in Lombok Island.

ABSTRACT

ERSA HERWINDA (2006). Model of Ecosystem-Based Management Approach

in Lombok Island. Under the supervision of HATRISARI HARDJOMIDJOJO
and IWAN SETIAWAN.
Over the years, national development approaches in Indonesia is mainly
focused on economic dimension. Most of the time these efforts marginalized the
ecosystem fitnetion sustainability, which eventually will lead to the degradation of
ecosystem quality. Ecosystem management approach focused on the ecological
hnction of the natural system, regardless the administrative boundaries. The
application of ecosystem approach will help to reach a balance of conservation
and sustainable use of biological diversity. Biosphere reserve is one application
type of ecosystem management approach which has clearly defined management
boundary. On management level, it has zonation pattern for conservation and
development.
The objective of this study is to explore a model of ecosystem-based
management in Lombok Island. This study is conducted using biosphere reserve
approach as the first step in identifling measures for sustainable land use in
Lombok Island. The study aim is to explore the possibility to model an ecosystem
based management approach in the study area.
The ecosystem-based approach in this research imitates several humanecosystem models. Integration of several models is used because there is no exact
model in ecosystem-based approach. The similarity lies in the general procedures
of delineating zonation. The main procedures involved in this study are

multistakeholder forum for ecosystem delimitation, social-economic analysis,
conservation value analysis, vulnerability assessment and option evaluation.
The result of this study shows that ecosystem-based management approach
can be modeled in Lombok Island. The community preference diagram is created
to show the community preference to the ecosystem value. Social-economic map
is created to show the social-economic pattern and pressure to the study area.
Zonation map is created to show the importance of the conservation value within
study area. Vulnerability map is created to show the risk area in spatially explicit
manner. These maps are used as the basis to define what option that can be
performed in a specific area. One of the options recommended is to re-evaluate
the land status of 64 km2of core area with potentially the highest risk socialeconomic pressure, 273 km' of core area with moderate risk and 1,126 km2 with
low risk are recommended to be maintained as core area with resource
conservation priority.

TABLE OF CONTENT

..................................................................................................... i.
.................................................................................
...
CURRICULUM VITAE ...................................................................................

ABSI"I'ACT ...................................................................................................... iv
TABLE OF CONTENT ....................................................................................
vi
...
LIST OF TABLE ............................................................................................
LIST OF FIGURE ................................................................................ .............x
...
LIST OF APPENDIX .....................................................................................
I.INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................
1

STATEMENT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

11

111

VIII

XIII

1.1. Background ............................................................................................... 1
1.2. Purpose of the Study ................................................................................. 3

IL LITERATURE REVIEW

.............................................................................4

2.1. Natural Resources and Ecosystem ............................................................. 4
2.2. Ecosystem Values, Component and Factors............................................ 8
2.3. Ecosystem Based Management, Biosphere Research and Zonation
Scheme ................................................................................................... 11
2.4. High Conservation Value Area ................................................................ 15
2.5. Environmental Modeling ......................................................................... 18
2.6. Spatial Analysis and Vulnerability Assessment ....................................... 20
....................................................2 4
2.7. Lombok Ecosystem ......................
.

m.RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ..............................................................27

3.1. Time and Location .................................................................................. 27
3.2. Type of data and resources ...................................................................... 28
3.3. Research Procedures .............................................................................. 2 9
3.3.1. Preparation ....................................................................................... 30
3.3.2. Local Perspective on Ecosystem ....................................................... 30
........................... 3 1
3.3.3. Social-Economic Value Identification...............
.
3.3.4. Bio-Physical Value Identification .................................... .. ............. 3 5
3.3.5. High Conservation Value Area ........................................................ 3 6
3.3.6. Conservation Priority Analysis ......................................................
37
3.3.7. Zonation Criteria ............................................................................ 3 8
3.3.8. Vulnerability Assessment ................................................................4 1
....................................................... 4 6
3.3.9. Option Evaluation............... .
.

.

IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION.................................,.,.............................48

4.1. Result ............................................................................... ....................... 48
4.1.1. Preparation ....................................................................................... 48
4.1.2. Local Perspective on Ecosystem ....................................................... 50
4.1.3. Social-Economic Analysis ................................................................ 51
4.1.4. Bio-Physical Analysis....................................................................... 57
.

.

7
4.1.5. High Conservation Value Area ...................................................5
.........................................................
4.1.6. Conservation Priority Analysis
59
4.1.7. Zonation Scheme.............................................................................. 65
4.1.8. Vulnerability Assessment ................................................................ 6 6

4.1.9. Option Evaluation......................................................................... 8 2
4.2. Discussion...............................................................................................83
4.2.1. Preparation ...................................................................................... 83
4.2.2. Local Perspective on Ecosystem .......................................................84
4.2.3. Social-Economic Analysis ................................................................86
4.2.4. Bio-Physical Analysis ...................................................................... -91
4.2.5. High Conservation Value Area ......................................................... 92
4.2.6. Conservation Priority Analysis ........................................................ 9 4
4.2.7. Zonation Scheme ............................................................................ 120
4.2.8. Vulnerability Assessment ............................................................... 125
4.2.9. Option Evaluation........................................................................... 160

.

........................................163

V CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1. Conclusion ............................................................................................
5 .2. Recommendation ..................................................................................

163
165

................................................................................167
APPENDIX ....................................................................................................170
LIST OF REFERENCE

LIST OF TABLE

No

Caption

Page

1 . Habitat Type and Their Important Role .......................................................... 5
2. Factors of Deforestation ................................................................................. 9
3. Human Actions Leading to Wetland Loss .................................................... 11
4. Principle of Ecosystem Approach................................................................. 12
5. Comparison of Ecosystem Approach and Biosphere Reserve Concept ......... 14
6 . High Conservation Value Area ..................................................................... 16
7. Protected Area Characteristic ....................................................................... 16
8. Area of West Nusa Tenggara Province by Districthlunicipality................... 24
9. Sources and Type of Data ............................................................................ 28
10. High Conservation Value Components......................................................... 37
1 1 . Components of High Conservation Value Area ............................................ 38
12. Classification of Zonation and Conservation Priority Type........................... 39
13. General Color-Code Classification for Scoring............................................ 4 2
14. Conservation Components Score.................................................................. 43
15. Combine Score of Tota! Social-Economic Components ............................... 45
16. Management Option for Combination of Conservation Components and
Total Social-Economic Score ....................................................................... 47
1 7. Identification of Social and Economic Factors.............................................. 52
18. Data Analysis Result ................................................................................. 53
19. Bio-Physical Analysis for Conservation Priority ......................................... 57
20. Analysis of High Conservation Value Area in Global Content within the
Framework of Indonesia Law and Regulation .............................................. 58
21 . Area of Conservation Priority Area Type 1 ........................................ . . . 59
22. Area of Conservation Priority Area Type 2 .................................................. 60
23. Area of Conservation Priority Area Type 3 .................................................. 61
24. Area of Conservation Priority Area Type 4 .................................................. 62
25. Area of Conservation Priority Area Type 5 .................................................. 64
26 . Conservation Priority Area Coverage in Lombok Island ...............................65
27. Area Coverage and Percentage of Each Zone .............................................. 66
28. Total Area of Each Score in Core Area ........................................................67
29. Total Area of Each Score in Buffer Zone .....................................................68
30. Coverage of Each Score of Population Density ............................................ 69
3 1 . Coverage of Each Score of Poverty Ratio .....................................................70
32. Coverage of Each Score of Village Revenue ................................................ 71
33 . Coverage of Each Social-Economic Score....................................................72
34. Combine Score of Core Area and Each Social-Economic Components......... 73

3 5 . Total Area of Each Combine Score of Core Area and Population Density .... 73
36 . Total Area of Each Combine Score of Core Area and Poverty Ratio ............ 74
3 7. Total Area of Each Combine Score of Core Area and Village Revenue ........ 75
3 8 . Combine Score of Buffer Zone and Each Social-Economic Components...... 76
39. Total Area of Each Combine Score of Buffer Zone and Population
Density ........................................................................................................ 77
40. Total Area of Each Combine Score of Buffer Zone and Poverty Ratio ......... 78
4 1 . Total Area of Each Combine Score of Buffer Zone and Village Revenue ..... 79
42. Combine Score of Core Area and Buffer Zone with Total SocialEconomic Components ................................................................................80
43 . Total Area of Combine Score of Core Area and Total Social-Economic
Score............................................................................................................ 80
44. Total Area of Each Combine Score of Buffer Zone and Total SocialEconomic Score ........................................................................................... 81
45 . Area Coverage of Each Management Option................................................ 82
46. Data Analysis Result of Normal Distribution .............................................. 88
47. Comparative Analysis Result of Each Component to the Average Value ...... 89
48 . Data Availability for Determining High Conservation Value Area .............. -93
49. Protected Area Criteria for Downstream Protection Function ....................... 95
50. Parameters of Species Habitat ...................................................................... 97
51 . Policy Analysis of Forest Patches Measures ................................................. 98
..
. .
52. Cnt~calEcosystem Cntena......................................................................... 104
53. Earthquake Area in Lombok Island ............................................................ 107
54. Water Resource and Aqua Culture Criteria.......................
.
.
............. 112
55. Area of Forest Cover within Watershed ................................................... 115
56. Cultural Use Criteria .................................................................................. 118
57. Traditional Use Area in Lombok Island ...................
.
............................ 120
58. Classification of Conservation Priority Area in Zonation Type ................... 122
59. Location of Core Area and Buffer Zone Clusters........................................ 124

LIST OF FIGURE

No

Caption

Page

1. Hierarchical Steps of Landscape Ecological Planning Method
(LANDEP) (Ru2ieka & Miklos. 1990 in Naveh & Lieberman. 1993)........... 18
2. Schematic Presentation of a Regional Socio-Economic Ecological
System Model (Messerli & Messerli, 1978 in Naveh & Lieberman.
20
1993) .......................................................................................................
3. Vulnerability Assessment Process (NOAA - CSC. 1999)............................. 22
4. Study Area and Geographic Name (Toponimy) in Map .............................
27
5. Scope of Analysis ........................................................................................ 29
6. Flow of Thinking in Identifying Social-Economic Factors............................ 32
7. Flow Chart of Building Zonation.................................................................. 40
8. Data Preparation Procedure .......................................................................... 49
9. Result of Multi Stakeholder Forum on Priority Strategies............................. 50
10. Road Network I&-astructure........................................................................ 53
11. Data Distribution of Total Population........................................................... 54
12. Data Distribution of Population Density ....................................................... 54
55
13. Data Distribution of Poor Family ...............................................................
14. Data Distribution of Poverty Ratio ............................................................... 55
...
.... 56
15. Data Distribution of Village Revenue in Lombok Island .................
16. Forest Area Above 2000m ........................................................................... 59
17. Forest Area With Slope L 40% ..................................................................... 59
.
................................................. 60
18. Conservation Area Type 1...................... .
19. Forest Cover 2 50 Ha ................................................................................... 60
20. Habitat Corridor........................................................................................... 60
2 1. Conservation Area Type 2 ...........................................................................6 1
61
22. Wetlands .....................................................................................................
23 . Earthquake Area .........................................................................................61
24. Conservation Area Type 3 ..................... .
.
................................................... 62
25 . Water source Buffer Area .............................................................................63
26. Forest in Priority Watershed .........................................................................63
27. Aqua Culture Sources Area ......................................................................... 63
28. Conservation Area Type 4 ............................................................................63
29. Conservation Area Type 5 ............................................................................ 64
30. Zonation Scheme of Lombok Island ............................................................. 65
3 1. Conservation Components Score in Core Area ........................... ...--........... 67
32. Conservation Components Score in Buffer Zone .......................................... 68
33. Spatial Distribution of Population Density .................................-- ..-- .......... 69

34. Spatial Distribution of Poverty Ratio ............................................................70
35. Spatial Distribution of Village Revenue ....................................................... 71
36 . Spatial Distribution of Total Social-economic Score ................................... 72
37 . Spatial Distribution of Combine Score of Core Area and Population
Density ........................................................................................................
74
38. Spatial Distribution of Combine Score of Core Area and Poverty Ratio ....... 75
39 . Spatial Distribution of Combine Score of Core Area and Village
Revenue ...................................................................................................
76
40. Spatial Distribution of Combine Score of Buffer Zone and Population
Density ........................................................................................................ 77
4 1 . Spatial Distribution of Combine Score of Buffer Zone and Poverty Ratio .... 78
42. spatial Distribution of Combine Score of Buffer Zone and Village
Revenue ....................................................................................................... 79
43. Spatial Distribution of Combine Score of Core Area and Total Social
Economic Score ........................................................................................... 81
44 . Spatial Distribution of Combine Score of Buffer Zone and Total Social
Economic Score ........................................................................................... 82
45 . Standard Deviation (o)Diagram................................................................... 87
46. Histogram of Population Density Data Distribution to the Average
..................................................................... 90
Value ............................... .
.
47. Histogram of Poverty Ratio Data Distribution to the Average Value ............ 90
48. Histogram of Village Revenue Data Distribution to the Average Value ........ 91
49. Conservation Priority Area Type 1 and Its Components ............................... 96
50. Conservation Priority Area Type 2 and Its Components .............................. 101
5 1 . Conservation Priority Area Type 3 and Its Components ............................. 105
52. Map of Combine Value of Wetland Area and Critical Earthquake Area ..... 108
53 . Conservation Priority Area Type 4 and Its Components ............................. 113
54. Water Source and Settlement Distribution ................................................. 114
55. Conservation Priority Area Type 5 and Its Components ............................. 119
56. Zonation in Lombok Island .......................................................................123
57. Area Zoning (inset) and Conservation Component Value of Core Area ...... 127
58. Area Zoning (inset) and Conservation Component Value of Buffer Zone ... 130
.
.
........................... 133
59. Population Density Score of Lombok Island..............
60. Spatial Pattern of Population Density, Road Network and Growth Center .. 135
6 1 . Poverty Ratio Score of Lombok Island .......................................................136
62. Village Revenue Score of Lombok Island ...................................... ......... 139
63 . Total Social-Economic Score of Lombok Island ........................................ 141
64. Spatial Distribution of Combine Core-Population Density .......................... 144
65. Spatial Distribution of Combine Core-Poverty Ratio .................................. 147
66. Spatial Distribution of Combine Core -Village Revenue............................. 149
67 . Spatial Distribution of Combine Buffer - Population Density ..................... 151

68 . Spatial Distribution of Combine Buffer .Poverty Ratio ............................. 153
69. Spatial Distribution of Combine Buffer -Village Revenue .......................... 155
70. Spatial Distribution of Combine Core and Total Social-Economic Score.... 157
71 . Spatial Distribution of Combine Buffer and Total Social-Economic
Score.......................................................................................................... 159

LIST OF APPENDIX

No
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Caption

Page

List of Data and Data Processing................................................................ 171
Social Economic Data Analysis.................................................................. 173
Total Social-Economic Score, Sum of Village Score .................................. 175
Map o f Zonation Scheme in Lornbok Island ............................................... 176
Map of Vulnerability Analysis on Core Area in Lombok Island ................. 177
Map of Vulnerability Analysis on Buffer Zone in Lombok Island .............. 178

I. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background

Over the years, national development in Indonesia is mainly focused on
economic dimension. The use of economic dimensions in the planning process is
obvious. Most development planning approaches mainly based on economic
variable and development.
Macro development planning is development planning in global scale.
Economic growth, community and government investment growth, and other
global variable are studied within macro planning approach (Bappenas, 2005).
This approach takes into account the micro economic variables as the basis to
determine the goal and objectives that can be achieved within certain period.
Furthermore, sectoral planning approach is conducted to simplie the calculation
in achieving the goal and objectives in macro planning. Development planning
with regional approach is focused on the location where the activities are carried
out. This approach is focused on optimizing the spatial utilization. Micro
development planning approach is detail planning in short time period (usually

annual:^), of macro, sectoral and regional approach, along with their activities and
budgeting details (Bappenas, 2005).
All of the approaches above focused on the economic growth of certain
location, usually refers to certain administrative boundaries. There are many
efforts to achieve the economic growth.

Most of the time these efforts

marginalized the ecosystem fbnctioa sustainability, which eventually will lead to
the degradation of ecosystem quality.
A new paradigm then emerges, mostly &om the conservationists, which

urge the bio-centric approach to be included in development planning. One of the
approaches is called ecosystem management approach. Ecosystem management
approach focused on the ecological knction of the natural system, regardless the
administrative boundaries. The application of ecosystem approach will help to
reach a balance of conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.

Current development planning is employed in the form of current land
utilization. On the other hand, ecosystem based approach is a concept that
globally known but implemented locally in parts, either for its conservation
function, development hnction or supportive function.

The ecosystem approach

does not preclude other management and conservation approaches, such as
biosphere reserves, protected areas, and single-species conservation programs, as
well as other approaches carried out under existing national policy and legislative

frameworks.

- In order to effectively manage the land, water and the living resources,
there need to be clearly defined boundaries for the management unit. Biosphere
reserve is one application type of ecosystem management approach which has
clearly defined management boundary.
Biosphere reserves are sites which established as places to promote
biodiversity conservation and sustainable development at regional scale, based on
local community efforts (MAB, 2002). On management level, it has zonation
pattern for conservation and development. This zonation includes strictly
protected core areas, typically surrounded by buffer zones where conservation is
emphasized, but where people also live and work, and the whole is surrounded by
a transition area, or area of co-operation, which promotes sustainable
development. These zones can be used by the management unit as the basis for
spatial planning within certain region. The zonation management is designed with
the main hnction to protect the sustainability of the living environment.
Therefore, the management type is designed to prevent the increasing damage of
the function granted by the environment.

Sometimes, the objective in establishing the conservation area and buffer
area has to compromise with the need of human welfare. Thus, the areas are
degraded or converted into different land utilization.

This phenomena is

threatened the existence of the conservation and buffer area, either the existence
of its presence in spatial term or of its environmental function.

In order to diminish the environmental damage, the existing land use
should be restored to its original fbnction as possible. The first thing to do is to

determine which area still have its origin fknction and which area already utilize
as different use.
From the descriptions above we can clearly presume that geographic
information is the important characteristic to analyze the phenomena. Geographic
information system is used to store and manipulate geographic information, along
with its capability to analyze objects and phenomena where geographic location is
the critical component to the analysis. Hence, this system is chosen to achieve the
goal of this study.
. Lombok is chosen as the study area.

It is chosen according to the

availability of data andlor information on land and coastal resources. Moreover,
Lombok as an Island is an ideal example of one ecosystem unit. It has natural
boundary, hnctioning as outer boundary.
1.2. Purpose of the Study

The objective of this study is to build a model of ecosystem-based
management in Lombok Island. This study is focused to answer the research
questions on:
1. How the ecosystem based management approach can be modeled in Lombok

Island;
2. What improvements in management practices, within the present use, are

possible to accommodate the ecosystem based approach.
This study is conducted using biosphere reserve approach as the first step
in identiQing measures for sustainable land use in Lombok Island. The outcome
from this study does not meant to be as a recommendation that an ecosystem
based management should be established. The study aim is to explore the
possibility to model an ecosystem based management approach in the study area,
using publicly available data.

11. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Natural Resources and Ecosystem

Ecosystems sustain life on Earth. They provide vital ecological services by
cleaning up and absorbing pollution, protecting coastlines, supplying "wild" food
from fish to bush meat, conserving genetic resources needed for crops and
pharmaceuticals, maintaining soils and hydrology, pollinating crops and much
more.
Ecosystems are important not just from an aesthetic or ethical point of
view; they play roles that are crucial to human survival and prosperity. Wetlands
purifjr water and assimilate waste. Forests stimulate local rainfall and prevent
erosion and floods. Coral reefs and mangroves protect coasts from erosion. In all
their variety, ecosystems both constitute and harbor the biological diversity that
makes up the stuff of life.
Indonesian biodiversity strategy and action plan recognize four major
ecosystems (Bappenas, 2003) which are agro-ecosystem, forest ecosystem,
wetland ecosystem and marine and coastal ecosystem. According to Harrison &
Pearce (2001), there are three major ecosystem types, which are forest ecosystem,
freshwater ecosystem and marine ecosystem. While Winpenny (1991) stated
eight major habitats, namely the aquatic environment (include oceans, large inland
seas and largely enclosed bodies of water, small islands and sensitive coastal
system like reefs and beaches), watersheds, tropical rain forests, drylands
(includes arid and semi-arid areas with h mean annual rainfall in the range of 3001500mm), irrigated lowland farming areas, wetlands (include marine, estuarine,
riverine, lacustrine or marsh, bog and swamp), wildlands (include all relatively
undisturbed ecosystems, whether terrestrial, or linked to inland water bodies, and
coastal or marine areas) and industrial and urban concentrations.
Table below illustrate major habitat type with each vital environmental
issues and services which they provided. The importance of each habitat is
summarized by Winpenny (199 1) in the table.

Table 1. Habitat Type and Their Important Role
Major Habitat

The aquatic
environment

-

-

Watersheds

-

Tropical rain
forests

Environmental Servias

Vital Environmental Issues

-

Global warming, will lead to sea
level rise, inundated low-lying
coastal areas, submerged small
islands, increasing storm damage;
A fall in sea level in inland seas;
Pollution in the high sea and coastal
waters;
Overexploitationof aquatic
resources;
Small, low-lying islands, coral atolls
are at risk h m storms saline
intrusion and rising sea level;
Reefs and beaches are being lost as a
result of dynamiting, pollution, and
the excavation of sand;
Rich biodiversity of the sea, the
reefs and wetlaads on its fringes.
Watersehed degradation, will lead to
soil erosion, increasing water flows
and yield, sedimentation;
Vegetation cover arxd land use
change in a watershed,will lead to
increased exposure of the earth to
mechanical effects of rain and runoff, greater run-off water, less water
retention, the bransportation of
sediment.
Deforestation, caused by
mcontrolled c o m m d logging
and pioneer settlement.

-

-

-

-

Drylands

-

Desertification, caused by climatic
changes, population growth and
migration

-

-

Fisheries;
Biodiversity and wildlife;
Amenity and recreation.

Climatic aad atmospheric;
Watershed effect to presewe
stability of slopes, inhibits
soil erosion, regulate water
flows and moderates
downstream deposition and
silting);
Local soil protection and
conservation of fertiliw,
Biodiversity and genetic
store;

Life support system for forest

dwellers;
Source of commercial
products;
Ecological links;
Aesthetic, spiritual and
existence value.
Direct benefit such as crops,
livestock, tree products, wood
fuel, oil and mined wealth,
wildlife and tourism;
Ecological effects.

-

Irrigated lowland
farming areas

1-

Wetlands

Environmental Services

Vital Environmental Issues

Major Habitat

'
I

-

1I -1

-

Fertility, salinity and water logging;
Water flow and quality;
Health;
Wildlife and genetic diversity;
Climatic effects.
In-fillingwith dm expansion,
industrial plants, agricultural
encroachment, dumps for spoil,
refuse and hazardous waste;
Excavation for source extraction and
construction projects;
Changes in hydrology;
Chemical changes (chemical
content) of its water intake;
Biological effects of wetlands
biomass.

-

-

-

-

-

Wildlands

I

Inctustrial and
concentrations

'1 -1-

Geopolitical pressure;
Demographic pressure;
Economic pressure.
Overcrowded;
Lacking elementary public services;
Air and water pollution;
Toxic and noxious waste;
Noise pollution;
Congestion;
Landslide and subsidence.

-

-

ProdM such as fish and
shellfish; birds, animal and
other wildlife; wood and other
tree products; agriculture and
livestock; peat as energy
mrcq reeds, salt, sand,
gravel and other products;
water supply and regulation;
Coastal protection;
Wildlife habitat;
Tourism and recreation;
Transport;
Biophysical externalitiesfor
fishing;
Climatic effects.
Biodiversity;
Products;
Function.

1991

Forests are the planet's largest reservoir of biological diversity, containing
an estimated half of all the world's plant and animal species. They also play a
vital role in maintaining ecological services such as the water and carbon cycles,
by storing carbon, conserving soils and generating rainfall (Harrison & Pearce,
2001).

Pressures on forests include high population growth rates, making

demands on land for farming in particular; industrial enterprise based on natural
resources, such as for timber and pulp production; and demand for fuel wood and
charcoal, which consumed 80% of the timber cut in developing countries in 1995.
Piecemeal forest removal has also fragmented forest regions, which has a
disproportionate effect on species diversity by limiting the ecosystem's ability to
recover from catastrophes such as fires and by reducing species mobility.

Wetland is lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic system, where
the water table is usually at or near the surface, or the land is covered by shallow
water (Turner, 1988 in Winpenny, 1991). Wetland can be permanent, temporary
or seasonal, with static or flowing water, which may be fiesh, brackish or salt.
According to the RAMSAR Convention, wetlands area swamp, brackish, peat
areas, or other natural or human made water bodies that are flooded with &esh,
brackish or salt water, including marine waters whose depth is not more than six
meters during low tide. Wetlands also include the edges or river watershed or
coastal areas near wetlands and with islands or marine waters whose depth is not
more than six meters during low tide, and are located in wetlands. There are two
types of wetlands, natural and artificial. Natural wetlands consist of mangrove,
peat swamp, fieshwater swamp, sea-grass, coral reef and lakes. Artificial wetlands
consist of paddy field, pond and freshwater pond.
Freshwater ecosystem, one of the wetland types, typically have a high
concentration of nutrients, making them rich habitats for the many small
organisms on which fish and other water life feed, in turn attracting mammals and
birds. Many, such as acidic peat land bogs, provide unique ecological niches for
wildlife. Humans have damaged wetlands by damming, dyking and canalizing
rivers, converting floodplains to aquaculture, planting trees on bogs, draining
marshes for agriculture, forestry and urban development and mining them for
peat, often with heavy state subsidy. But throughout history, agricultural activity
has been the most important single cause of damage, with wetlands, including
traditional wet pastures, drained to provide croplands (Harrison & Pearce, 2001).
Watershed is the total land area that drains to some point on a stream or

river (Winpenny, 1991). Pereira, 1989 (in Winpenny, 1991) defines catchments
area or river basin is the area drained by a river, while watershed is the high
ground separating adjacent catchments areas.
Wildland is natural land and water areas which have been only slightly, or
not at all, modified by modem society (Ledec and Goodland, 1988 in Winpenny,
1991). Winpenny (1991) also stated that wildland is a large overlap with other

habitat type, however different by definition, that wildlands do not contain
sizeable numbers of people. They are nevertheless important to humanity for their

vital biodiversity support, direst products, and the range of environmental function
support.
2.2. Ecosystem Values, Component and Factors

The demands of rising human populations in many regions are now
impacting most of the world's ecosystems. All ecosystems fiom the local to the
global are under threat fiom the pressures of human resource extraction and
pollutior, driven by population, consumption and technology (Harrison & Pearce,
200 1').
Deforestation results fiom complex socio-economic processes and in many
situations it is impossible to isolate a single cause. Deforestation has multiple
causes with the particular mix of causes varying fiom place to place. It may be
difficult to generalize that one or several facters are the most important.
Kaimowitz & Angelsen (1998) has reviewed several model of deforestation. In
general, they classified the agents of deforestation into two, which are the direct
agents and the underlying causes.

The direct agents include physical

environment, agricultural price, timber price, wages and off-farm employment,
agricultural input price, technology, accessibility, property regime and strategic
behavior. The underlying causes include population, income, external debt, trade
and structural adjustment, and political factors.
From contradictory opinion during their research, they break down the
usually complex set of actions, factors and rationales involved in tropical
deforestation into limited number of three aggregate proximate causes
(agricultural expansion, wood extraction and expansion of infrastructure), five
broad categories of underlying driving forces (demographic, economic,
technological, policy/institutional, and cultural/socio-political factors) and three
environmental factor (land characteristic, biophysical drivers and social trigger
events).
More structured break down is presented by Geist & Lambin (2001), as
resumed in table below.

Table 2. Factors of Deforestation
Variables

Factors
Agricultural expansion

-

-

Wood extraction

-

-

Expansion of
hfmtructure

-

Demographic

-

-

-

Economic

-

-

Technological

-

Policy/institutional
CulturaVsocio-political
Land characteristic

-

-

Biophysical drivers
1

Social trigger events

-

-

Shifting cultivation
Permanent cultivation
Cattle ranching
Colonization. transmigration, resettlement
Commercial wood extraction
Fuel wood exwction
Pole wood extraction
Charcoal production
Transporthhtmdm
Market infimtmcture
PUbli~~e~ce~
Settlement expansion
Private enterprise ~ t r u c t u r e
Populationpressure
Population growth
Natural increment (fertility, mortality)
Immigmtion
Population density
(Uneven) spatial population distribution
Life cycle features
Market growth & commercialization
Specific economic structures
Uhank&on& i n d u s t d i d o n
Special economic parameters
Agro technological changes
Technological applicationsin the wood sector
Other production factors in agriculture
Formal policies
Informal policies @olicy climate)
Property right regimes
Public attitudes, values, beliefs
Individual and household behavior
Soil related
Slope & topography related
Water related
Vegetation related
Soil related
Water related
Vegetation related
(Civil) war, rebellion, revolution, social unrest & disorder
Health & economic crisis conditions
Abrupt (& violent) population displacements (refugee
movements)
Government policy failure

Source: Geist & Lambin, 2001

Proximate causes are human activities that that directly affect the
environment and thus constitute proximate sources of change (Turner et al, 1990,
1993). They connect the changes in land cover (biophysical attributes of the
earth's surface)\and land use (human purpose or intent applied to human activities

that directly alter the physical environment). They can be interpreted as more
immediate, direct factors, which originate from land use and directly impact upon
forest cover. Proximate causes change land cover, create conversion of forest to
other cover types, with krther environmental consequences that may ultimately
feedback to affect land use.
Underlying driving forces (or social processes) are seemed to be
hndamental forces that emphasize the more obvious or proximate causes of
tropical deforestation. They can be seen as a complex of social, political,
economic, technological and cultural variables that constitute initial conditions in
the human-environmental relations that are structural (or systemic) in nature
(Geist & Lambin, 2001). It is more difficult to establish clear links between
underlying factors and deforestation than between immediate causes and
deforestation, since the causal relationship are less direct (Kaimowitz & Angelsen,
1998).
Mangrove swamps, sea-grass beds, salt marshes and coral reefs are all
examples of marine and coastal environments which are very important in
sustaining human life, but which are in serious decline at a global level.
According to Hamson & Pearce (2001), agricultural activity has been the most
important single cause of damage with wetlands. Table below summarize the
human actions and the impact to wetland loss.

Table 3. Human Actions Leading to Wetland Loss
Causes

Drainage for agriculture, forestry & mosquito
control .
Dredging & canalization for navigation and
flood protection
Filling for solid waste disposal, roads &
commercial, industrial or residential
development
Conversion for aquaculture
Constmction of dykes, dams and seawall for

Flood
plains

Rivers Lakes

+

A

0

*

* Common & important cause of loss

0 Present but not a major cause of loss

Absent or exceptional
Source: Harrison & Pearce, 2001

2.3. Ecosystem Based Management, Biosphere Research and Zonation

Scheme
The ecosystem approach is a strategy for the integrated management of
land, water and living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use in
an equitable way. Thus, the application of the ecosystem approach will help to
reach a balance of the three objectives of the Convention of Biological Diversity:
conservation; sustainable use; and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits
arising out of the utilization of genetic resources (CBD Secretariat, 2004). Article
2 of the Convention on Biological Diversity defines ecosystem as a dynamic

complex of plant, animal and microorganism communities and their non-living
environment interacting as a fbnctional unit. This definition does not specify any
particular spatial unit or scale. Thus, the term ecosystem can refer to any

hnctioning unit at any scale. Indeed, the scale of analysis and action should be
determined by the problem being addressed.
The ecosystem approach is based on the application of appropriate
scientific methodologies focused on levels of biological organization, which
encompass the essential structure, processes, fbnctions and interactions among
organisms and their environment (CBD Secretariat, 2004). It also recognizes that
humans, with their cultural diversity, are an integral component of many
ecosystems. The ecosystem approach is essential as guiding action for the various
programs or activities. The recognition of human factor in ecosystem approach
reflected in its p~ncipleand implementation guidelines, as shown in table below.
Table 4. Principle of Ecosystem Approach
Principle

Description

The objectives of management of land, water and living resources are a matter of
societal choice.
Management should be decentralized to the lowest appropriate level.
Principle 2
Ecosystem managers should consider the effects (actual or potectia) of their
Principle 3
I activities on adjacent and other ecosystems.
1 Recognizing potential gains from management, there is usually a need to
Principle 4
understand and manage the ecosystem in an economic context Any such
ecosystem-management program should:
Reduce those market distortions that adversely affect biological diversity;
Align incentivesto promote biodiversity conservation and sustakble use;
1 lnterdize costs and benefits in the "eiven ecosvstem to the extent feasible.
1 Conservation of ecosystem structure and functioning,
Princivle 5
- in order to maintain
iecosvstem services, sh&d be a priority target of the ecosystem approach
Princi~le
6
1 Ecosvstems must be mawxd
.
" within the limits of their function in^.
"
( The ecosystem approach should be undertaken at the appropriate spatid and
Principle 7
I temporal scales.
I Recognizing the varying temporal scales and lageffects that characterize
Principle 8
ecosystemprocesses, objectives for ecosystem management should be set for the
long term.
Principle 9
Management must recognize that change is inevitable.
The ecosystem approach should seek the appropriate balance between, and
Principle 10
integration of, conservation and use of biological diversity.
Principle 11
The ecosystem approach should consider all forms of relevant information,
including scientific and indigenous and local knowledge, innovations and
practices.
The ecosystem approach should involve all relevant sectors of society and
Principle 12
scientific disciplines.
Source: CBD Secretariat,2004
Principle 1

Moreover, parties of the Convention on Biological Diversities agreed that
the ecosystem approach requires adaptive management to deal with the complex

and dynamic nature of ecosystems and the absence of complete knowledge or
understanding of their hnctioning (CBD Secretariat 200